The Nibbāna Sermons 12 to 22 by Bhikkhu K Ñāṇananda

An e-learning course hosted by the

Numata Center for Buddhist Studies
University of Hamburg
in collaboration with the
Barre Center for Buddhist Studies
Massachusetts

Sermon 17
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa

Etaṃ santaṃ, etaṃ paṇītaṃ, yadidaṃ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho

sabbūpadhipaṭinissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṃ.
"This is peaceful, this is excellent, namely the stilling of all preparations, the
relinquishment of all assets, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation,
extinction". With the permission of the Most Venerable Great Preceptor and the
assembly of the venerable meditative monks. This is the seventeenth sermon in
the series of sermons on Nibbāna.
In our last sermon, we tried to analyse some discourses that give us a clue to
understand what sort of an experience an arahant has in his realization of the
cessation of existence in the arahattaphalasamādhi.
We happened to mention that the arahant sees the cessation of existence with
a deeply penetrative vision of the void that may be compared to a gaze that
knows no horizon. We also dropped the hint that the non-manifestative
consciousness, endless and lustrous on all sides, we had spoken of in an earlier
sermon, is an explicit reference to this same experience.
How the arahant, ranging in his triple pasture of the signless deliverance, the
undirected deliverance and the void deliverance, animitta vimokkha, appaṇihita
vimokkha and suññata vimokkha, gets free from the latency to perception,
transcends the duality of form and formless, and crosses over this ocean of
existence unhindered by Māra, has been described in various ways in various
discourses.
Let us now take up for discussion in this connection three significant verses
that are found in the Itivuttaka.
Ye ca rūpūpagā sattā
ye ca arūpaṭṭhāyino,
nirodhaṃ appajānantā
āgantāro punabbhavaṃ.
Ye ca rūpe pariññāya,
arūpesu asaṇṭhitā,
nirodhe ye vimuccanti,
te janā maccuhāyino.
Kāyena amataṃ dhātuṃ,
phusaytivā nirūpadhiṃ,
upadhipaṭinissaggaṃ,
sacchikatvā anāsavo,
deseti sammāsambuddho,
asokaṃ virajaṃ padaṃ.
"Those beings that go to realms of form,
And those who are settled in formless realms,
Not understanding the fact of cessation,
Come back again and again to existence.
Those who, having comprehended realms of form,
Do not settle in formless realms,
Are released in the experience of cessation,
It is they that are the dispellers of death.
Having touched with the body the deathless element,
Which is asset-less,
And realized the relinquishment of assets,
Being influx-free, the perfectly enlightened one,
Proclaims the sorrow-less, taintless state."
-------------------------------
Translation Ireland (1991: 49):
“Those beings who reach the form realm
And those established in the formless,
If they do not know cessation
Come back to renewal of being.
“Those who fully understand forms
Without getting stuck in the formless,
Are released in cessation
And leave Death far behind them.
Having touched with his own person
The deathless element free from clinging,
Having realized the relinquishment
Of clinging, his taints all gone,
The Fully Enlightened One proclaims
The sorrowless state that is void of stain.”
-------------------------------
The meaning of the first verse is clear enough. Those who are in realms of
form and formless realms are reborn again and again due to not understanding
the fact of cessation.
 In the case of the second verse, there is some confusion as to the correct
reading. We have mentioned earlier, too, that some of the deep discourses
present considerable difficulty in determining what the correct reading is. They
have not come down with sufficient clarity. Where the meaning is not clear
enough, there is a likelihood for the oral tradition to become corrupt. Here we
accepted the reading asaṇṭhitā.
Ye ca rūpe pariññāya,
arūpesu asaṇṭhitā,
"Those who, having comprehended realms of form,
Do not settle in formless realms".
But there is the variant reading susaṇṭhitā, which gives the meaning "settled
well". The two readings contradict each other and so we have a problem here.
The commentary accepts the reading asaṇṭhitā. We too followed it, for some
valid reason and not simply because it accords with the commentary.
However, in several modern editions of the text, the reading asaṇṭhitā has
been replaced by susaṇṭhitā, probably because it seems to make sense, prima
facie.
But, as we pointed out in this series of sermons, there is the question of the
dichotomy between the form and the formless. The formless, or arūpa, is like
the shadow of form, rūpa. Therefore, when one comprehends form, one also
understands that the formless, too, is not worthwhile settling in. It is in that
sense that we brought in the reading asaṇṭhitā in this context.
Those who have fully comprehended form, do not depend on the formless
either, and it is they that are released in the realization of cessation. They
transcend the duality of form and formless and, by directing their minds to the
cessation of existence, attain emancipation.
In the last verse it is said that the Buddha realized the relinquishment of assets
known as nirupadhi, the "asset-less". It also says that he touched the deathless
element with the body. In a previous sermon we happened to quote a verse from
the Udāna which had the conclusive lines:
Phusanti phassā upadhiṃ paṭicca,
Nirupadhiṃ kena phuseyyum phassā.
"Touches touch one because of assets,
How can touches touch him who is asset-less?"
-------------------------------
Translation Ireland (1990: 25):
“Contacts affect one dependent on clinging.
How can contacts affect one without clinging?”
--------------------------------
According to this verse, it seems that here there is no touch. So what we have
stated above might even appear as contradictory. The above verse speaks of a
'touching' of the deathless element with the body. One might ask how one can
touch, when there is no touch at all? But here we have an extremely deep idea,
almost a paradox.
To be free from touch is in itself the 'touching' of the deathless element.
What we mean to say is that, as far as the fear of death is concerned, here we
have the freedom from the pain of death and in fact the freedom from the
concept of death itself.
The Buddha and the arahants, with the help of that wisdom, while in that
arahattaphalasamādhi described as anāsavā cetovimutti paññāvimutti, or
akuppā cetovimutti, let go of their entire body and realized the cessation of
existence, thereby freeing themselves from touch and feeling. That is why
Nibbāna is called a bliss devoid of feeling, avedayita sukha.
This giving up, this letting go when Māra is coming to grab and seize, is a
very subtle affair. To give up and let go when Māra comes to grab is to touch
the deathless, because thereby one is freed from touch and feelings. Here, then,
we have a paradox. So subtle is this Dhamma!
How does one realize cessation? By attending to the cessation aspect of
preparations.
As we have already mentioned, to arise and to cease is of the nature of
preparations, and here the attention is on the ceasing aspect. The worldlings in
general pay attention to the arising aspect. They can see only that aspect. The
Buddhas, on the other hand, have seen the cessation of existence in a subtle way.
The culmination of the practice of paying attention to the cessation aspect of
preparations is the realization of the cessation of existence.
Bhava, or existence, is the domain of Māra. How does one escape from the
grip of Māra? By going beyond his range of vision, that is to say by attending to
the cessation of existence, bhavanirodha.
All experiences of pleasure and pain are there so long as one is in bhava. The
arahant wins to the freedom from form and formless and from pleasure and
pain, as it was said in a verse already quoted:
Atha rūpā arūpā ca,
sukhadukkhā pamuccati.
"And then from form and formless,
And from pleasure and pain is he freed."
-------------------------------
Translation Ireland (1990: 21):
“Then he is freed from form and formless,
Freed from pleasure and from pain.”
--------------------------------
We explained that verse as a reference to arahattaphalasamādhi. Here, too,
we are on the same point. The concept of the cessation of existence is indeed
very deep. It is so deep that one might wonder whether there is anything
worthwhile in Nibbāna, if it is equivalent to the cessation of existence.
 As a matter of fact, we do come across an important discourse among the
Tens of the Aṅguttara Nikāya, where Nibbāna is explicitly called bhavanirodha.
It is in the form of a dialogue between Venerable Ānanda and Venerable
Sāriputta. As usual, Venerable Ānanda is enquiring about that extraordinary
samādhi.
Siyā nu kho, āvuso Sāriputta, bhikkhuno tathārūpo samādhipaṭilābho yathā
neva pathaviyaṃ pathavisaññī assa, na āpasmiṃ āposaññī assa, na tejasmiṃ
tejosaññī assa, na vāyasmiṃ vāyosaññī assa, na ākāsānañcāyatane
ākāsānañcāyatanasaññī assa, na viññāṇañcāyatane viññāṇancāyatanasaññī
assa, na ākiñcaññāyatane ākiñcaññāyatanasaññī assa, na
nevasaññānāsaññāyatane nevasaññānāsaññāyatanasaññī assa, na idhaloke
idhalokasaññī assa, na paraloke paralokasaññī assa, - saññī ca pana assa?
"Could there be, friend Sāriputta, for a monk such an attainment of
concentration wherein he will not be conscious of earth in earth, nor of water in
water, nor of fire in fire, nor of air in air, nor will he be conscious of the sphere
of infinite space in the sphere of infinite space, nor of the sphere of infinite
consciousness in the sphere of infinite consciousness, nor of the sphere of
nothingness in the sphere of nothingness, nor of the sphere of neither-
perception-nor-non-perception in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-
perception, nor of a this world in this world, nor of a world beyond in a world
beyond - and yet he will be conscious?"
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1344):
“Friend Sāriputta, could a bhikkhu obtain such a state of concentration that he
would not be percipient of earth in relation to earth; of water in relation to
water; of fire in relation to fire; of air in relation to air; of the base of the
infinity of space in relation to the base of the infinity of space; of the base of
the infinity of consciousness in relation to the base of the infinity of
consciousness; of the base of nothingness in relation to the base of
nothingness; of the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception in relation
to the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; of this world in relation
to this world; of the other world in relation to the other world, but he would
still be percipient?”
--------------------------------
Venerable Sāriputta's reply to it is: "There could be, friend Ānanda." Then
Venerable Ānanda asks again: "But then, friend Sāriputta, in which manner
could there be such an attainment of concentration for a monk?"
At that point Venerable Sāriputta comes out with his own experience,
revealing that he himself once attained to such a samādhi, when he was at
Andhavana in Sāvatthi. Venerable Ānanda, however, is still curious to ascertain
what sort of perception he was having, when he was in that samādhi. The
explanation given by Venerable Sāriputta in response to it, is of utmost
importance. It runs:
 Bhavanirodho nibbānaṃ, bhavanirodho nibbānan'ti kho me, avuso, aññā'va
saññā uppajjati aññā'va saññā nirujjhati.
Seyyathāpi, āvuso, sakalikaggissa jhāyamānassa aññā'va acci uppajjati,
aññā'va acci nirujjhati, evam eva kho me āvuso bhavanirodho nibbānaṃ,
bhavanirodho nibbānam 'ti aññā'va saññā uppajjati aññā'va saññā nirujjhati,
bhavanirodho nibbānaṃ saññī ca panāhaṃ, āvuso, tasmiṃ samaye ahosiṃ.
"One perception arises in me, friend: 'cessation of existence is Nibbāna',
'cessation of existence is Nibbāna', and another perception fades out in me:
'cessation of existence is Nibbāna', 'cessation of existence is Nibbāna'.
Just as, friend, in the case of a twig fire, when it is burning one flame arises
and another flame fades out. Even so, friend, one perception arises in me:
'cessation of existence is Nibbāna', 'cessation of existence is Nibbāna', and
another perception fades out in me: 'cessation of existence is Nibbāna',
'cessation of existence is Nibbāna', at that time, friend, I was of the perception
'cessation of existence is Nibbāna'."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1345):
“One perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of
existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.
“Just as, when a fire of twigs is burning, one flame arises and another flame
ceases, so one perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The
cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’ On
that occasion, friend, I was percipient: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna.’”
--------------------------------
The true significance of the simile of the twig fire is that Venerable Sāriputta
was attending to the cessation aspect of preparations. As we mentioned in
connection with the formula etaṃ santaṃ, etaṃ paṇītaṃ, "this is peaceful, this is
excellent", occurring in a similar context, we are not to conclude that Venerable
Sāriputta kept on repeating 'cessation of existence is Nibbāna'.
The insight into a flame could be different from a mere sight of a flame.
Worldlings in general see only a process of burning in a flame. To the insight
meditator it can appear as an intermittent series of extinctions. It is the outcome
of a penetrative vision. Just like the flame, which simulates compactness,
existence, too, is a product of saṅkhāras, or preparations.
The worldling who attends to the arising aspect and ignores the cessation
aspect is carried away by the perception of the compact. But the mind, when
steadied, is able to see the phenomenon of cessation: ṭhitaṃ cittaṃ vippamuttaṃ,
vayañcassānupassati, "the mind steadied and released contemplates its own
passing away".
With that steadied mind the arahant attends to the cessation of preparations.
At its climax, he penetrates the gamut of existence made up of preparations, as
in the case of a flame, and goes beyond the clutches of death.
 As a comparison for existence, the simile of the flame is quite apt. We
happened to point out earlier, that the word upādāna can mean "grasping" as
well as "fuel". The totality of existence is sometimes referred to as a fire. The
fuel for the fire of existence is grasping itself. With the removal of that fuel, one
experiences extinction.
The dictum bhavanirodho nibbānam clearly shows that Nibbāna is the
cessation of existence. There is another significant discourse which equates
Nibbāna to the experience of the cessation of the six sense-bases,
saḷāyatananirodha. The same experience of realization is viewed from a
different angle. We have already shown that the cessation of the six sense-bases,
or the six sense-spheres, is also called Nibbāna.
The discourse we are now going to take up is one in which the Buddha
presented the theme as some sort of a riddle for the monks to work out for
themselves.
Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, se āyatane veditabbe yattha cakkhuñca nirujjhati
rūpasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha sotañca nirujjhati
saddasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha ghānañca nirujjhati
gandhasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha jivhā ca nirujjhati
rasasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha kāyo ca nirujjhati
phoṭṭabbasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe yattha mano ca nirujjhati
dhammasaññā ca virajjati, se āyatane veditabbe, se āyatane veditabbe.
"Therefore, monks, that sphere should be known wherein the eye ceases and
perceptions of form fade away, that sphere should be known wherein the ear
ceases and perceptions of sound fade away, that sphere should be known
wherein the nose ceases and perceptions of smell fade away, that sphere should
be known wherein the tongue ceases and perceptions of taste fade away, that
sphere should be known wherein the body ceases and perceptions of the tangible
fade away, that sphere should be known wherein the mind ceases and
perceptions of mind objects fade away, that sphere should be known, that sphere
should be known."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 1191):
“Therefore, bhikkhus, that base should be understood, where the eye ceases
and perception of forms fades away. That base should be understood, where
the ear ceases and perception of sounds fades away … That base should be
understood, where the mind ceases and perception of mental phenomena
fades away. That base should be understood.”
SĀ 211
是故，比丘！於彼入處當覺知，若眼滅，色想則離。耳、鼻、舌、身、意
滅，法想則離
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 53, b12-14)
--------------------------------
 There is some peculiarity in the very wording of the passage, when it says, for
instance, that the eye ceases, cakkhuñca nirujjhati and perceptions of form fade
away, rūpasaññā ca virajjati. As we once pointed out, the word virāga, usually
rendered by "detachment", has a nuance equivalent to "fading away" or
"decolouration". Here that nuance is clearly evident. When the eye ceases,
perceptions of forms fade away.
The Buddha is enjoining the monks to understand that sphere, not disclosing
what it is, in which the eye ceases and perceptions of form fade away, and
likewise the ear ceases and perceptions of sound fade away, the nose ceases and
perceptions of smell fade away, the tongue ceases and perceptions of taste fade
away, the body ceases and perceptions of the tangible fade away, and last of all
even the mind ceases and perceptions of mind objects fade away. This last is
particularly noteworthy.
Without giving any clue to the meaning of this brief exhortation, the Buddha
got up and entered the monastery, leaving the monks perplexed. Wondering how
they could get it explained, they approached Venerable Ānanda and begged him
to comment at length on what the Buddha had preached in brief. With some
modest reluctance, Venerable Ānanda complied, urging that his comment be
reported to the Buddha for confirmation. His comments, however, amounted to
just one sentence:
Saḷāyatananirodhaṃ, kho āvuso, Bhagavatā sandhāya bhāsitaṃ. "Friends, it
is with reference to the cessation of the six sense-spheres that the Exalted One
has preached this sermon."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2000: 1191):
“This was stated by the Blessed One, friends, with reference to the cessation of
the six sense bases.”
SĀ 211
「世尊略說者，即是滅六入處有餘之說」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 53, c2-3)
--------------------------------
When those monks approached the Buddha and placed Venerable Ānanda's
explanation before him, the Buddha ratified it. Hence it is clear that the term
āyatana in the above passage refers not to any one of the six sense-spheres, but
to Nibbāna, which is the cessation of all of them.
The commentator, Venerable Buddhaghosa, too accepts this position in his
commentary to the passage in question. Saḷāyatananirodhan'ti
saḷāyatananirodho vuccati nibbānam, tam sandhāya bhāsitan ti attho, "the
cessation of the six sense-spheres, what is called the cessation of the six sense-
spheres is Nibbāna, the meaning is that the Buddha's sermon is a reference to it".
The passage in question bears testimony to two important facts. Firstly that
Nibbāna is called the cessation of the six sense-spheres. Secondly that this
experience is referred to as an āyatana, or a 'sphere'.
 The fact that Nibbāna is sometimes called āyatana is further corroborated by
a certain passage in the Saḷāyatanvibhaṅgasutta, which defines the term
nekkhammasita domanassa. In that discourse, which deals with some deeper
aspects of the Dhamma, the concept of nekkhammasita domanassa, or
"unhappiness connected with renunciation", is explained as follows:
If one contemplates with insight wisdom the sense-objects like forms and
sounds as impermanent, suffering-fraught and transient, and develops a longing
for Nibbāna, due to that longing or expectation one might feel an unhappiness. It
is such an unhappiness which, however, is superior to an unhappiness connected
with the household life, that is called nekkhammasita domanassa, or
"unhappiness connected with renunciation".
How such an unhappiness may arise in a monk is described in that discourse
in the following manner:
'Kudāssu nāmāhaṃ tadāyatanaṃ upasampajja viharissāmi yadariyā etarahi
āyatanaṃ upasampajja viharanti?' iti anuttaresu vimokkhesu pihaṃ
upaṭṭhāpayato uppajjati pihāpaccayā domanassaṃ. Yaṃ evarūpaṃ
domanassaṃ idaṃ vuccati nekkhammasitadomanassaṃ.
"'O, when shall I attain to and dwell in that sphere to which the Noble Ones
now attain and dwell in?' Thus, as he sets up a longing for the incomparable
deliverances, there arises an unhappiness due to that longing. It is such an
unhappiness that is called unhappiness connected with renunciation."
-------------------------------
Translation Ñāṇamoli (1995: 1069):
“‘When shall I enter upon and abide in that base that the noble ones now
enter upon and abide in?’ In one who generates thus a longing for the supreme
liberations, grief arises with that longing as condition. Such grief as this is
called grief based on renunciation.”
MĀ 163
“‘When will I attain and dwell in that sphere, namely the sphere that the
noble ones attain and dwell in?’ This is [one’s] aspiration for the highest
liberation. The frightening knowledge of dukkha and sadness gives rise to
sadness. Sadness of this type is called sadness based on dispassion.”
Anālayo 2018: "The Challenge of Pain", Insight Journal, 44: 11–20.
--------------------------------
What are called "incomparable deliverances" are the three doorways to
Nibbāna, the signless, the undirected and the void. We can therefore conclude
that the sphere to which this monk aspires is none other than Nibbāna. So here
we have a second instance of a reference to Nibbāna as a 'sphere' or āyatana.
Now let us bring up a third:
Atthi, bhikkhave, tad āyatanaṃ, yattha n'eva pathavī na āpo na tejo na vāyo
na ākāsānañcāyatanaṃ na viññāṇānañcāyatanaṃ na ākiñcaññāyatanaṃ na
nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṃ na ayaṃ loko na paraloko na ubho candimasūriyā.
Tatra p'ahaṃ bhikkhave, n'eva āgatiṃ vadāmi na gatiṃ na ṭhitiṃ na cutiṃ na
upapattiṃ, appatiṭṭhaṃ appavattaṃ anārammaṇaṃ eva taṃ. Es'ev'anto
dukkhassā'ti.
Incidentally, this happens to be the most controversial passage on Nibbāna.
Scholars, both ancient and modern, have put forward various interpretations of
this much vexed passage. Its riddle-like presentation has posed a challenge to
many a philosopher bent on determining what Nibbāna is.
This brief discourse comes in the Udāna as an inspired utterance of the
Buddha on the subject of Nibbāna, Nibbānapaṭisamyuttasutta. To begin with,
we shall try to give a somewhat literal translation of the passage:
"Monks, there is that sphere, wherein there is neither earth, nor water, nor
fire, nor air; neither the sphere of infinite space, nor the sphere of infinite
consciousness, nor the sphere of nothingness, nor the sphere of neither-
perception-nor-non-perception; neither this world nor the world beyond, nor the
sun and the moon. There, monks, I say, is no coming, no going, no staying, no
passing away and no arising; it is not established, it is not continuing, it has no
object. This, itself, is the end of suffering."
-------------------------------
Translation Ireland (1990: 108):
“There is, bhikkhus, that state, where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no
air, no base consisting of the infinity of space, no base consisting of the infinity
of consciousness, no base consisting of nothingness, no base consisting of
neither-perception-nor-non-perception, neither this world nor another world
nor both, neither sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say there is no coming, no
going, no staying, no deceasing, no uprising. Not fixed, not moveable, it has no
support. Just this is the end of suffering.”
--------------------------------
Instead of getting down to the commentarial interpretation at the very outset,
let us try to understand this discourse on the lines of the interpretation we have
so far developed. We have already come across two references to Nibbāna as an
āyatana or a sphere. In the present context, too, the term āyatana is an allusion
to arahattaphalasamādhi. Its significance, therefore, is psychological.
First of all we are told that earth, water, fire and air are not there in that
āyatana. This is understandable, since in a number of discourses dealing with
anidassana viññāṇa and arahattaphalasamādhi we came across similar
statements. It is said that in anidassana viññāṇa, or non-manifestative
consciousness, earth, water, fire and air do not find a footing. Similarly, when
one is in arahattaphalasamādhi, one is said to be devoid of the perception of
earth in earth, for instance, because he does not attend to it. So the peculiar
negative formulation of the above Udāna passage is suggestive of the fact that
these elements do not exercise any influence on the mind of one who is in
arahattaphalasamādhi.
 The usual interpretation, however, is that it describes some kind of a place or
a world devoid of those elements. It is generally believed that the passage in
question is a description of the 'sphere' into which the arahant passes away, that
is, his after death 'state'. This facile explanation is often presented only as a tacit
assumption, for fear of being accused of heretical views. But it must be pointed
out that the allusion here is to a certain level of experience of the living arahant,
namely the realization, here and now, of the cessation of existence,
bhavanirodha.
The four elements have no part to play in that experience. The sphere of
infinite space, the sphere of infinite consciousness etc. also do not come in, as
we have already shown with reference to a number of discourses. So it is free
from both form and formless.
The statement that there is neither this world nor a world beyond could be
understood in the light of the phrase, na idhaloke idhalokasaññī, na paraloke
paralokasaññī, "percipient neither of a this world in this world, nor of a world
beyond in a world beyond" that came up in a passage discussed above.
The absence of the moon and the sun, na ubho candima sūriyā, in this sphere,
is taken as the strongest argument in favour of concluding that Nibbāna is some
kind of a place, a place where there is no moon or sun.
But as we have explained in the course of our discussion of the term
anidassana viññāṇa, or non-manifestative consciousness, with the cessation of
the six sense-spheres, due to the all lustrous nature of the mind, sun and moon
lose their lustre, though the senses are all intact. Their lustre is superseded by the
lustre of wisdom. They pale away and fade into insignificance before it. It is in
this sense that the moon and the sun are said to be not there in that sphere.
Why there is no coming, no going, no staying, no passing away and no
arising, can be understood in the light of what we have observed in earlier
sermons on the question of relative concepts. The verbal dichotomy
characteristic of worldly concepts is reflected in this reference to a coming and a
going etc. The arahant in arahattaphalasamādhi is free from the limitations
imposed by this verbal dichotomy.
The three terms appatiṭṭhaṃ, appavattaṃ and anārammaṇaṃ, "not
established", "not continuing" and "objectless", are suggestive of the three
doorways to deliverance. Appatiṭṭhaṃ refers to appaṇihita vimokkha,
"undirected deliverance", which comes through the extirpation of craving.
Appavattaṃ stands for suññata vimokkha, the "void deliverance", which is the
negation of continuity. Anārammaṇaṃ is clearly enough a reference to animitta
vimokkha, the "signless deliverance". Not to have an object is to be signless.
The concluding sentence "this itself is the end of suffering" is therefore a
clear indication that the end of suffering is reached here and now. It does not
mean that the arahant gets half of Nibbāna here and the other half 'there'.
Our line of interpretation leads to such a conclusion, but of course, in case
there are shortcomings in it, we could perhaps improve on it by having recourse
to the commentarial interpretation.
 Now as to the commentarial interpretation, this is how the
Udāna commentary explains the points we have discussed: It paraphrases the
term āyatana by kāraṇa, observing that it means reason in this context. Just as
much as forms stand in relation of an object to the eye, so the asaṅkhata dhātu,
or the "unprepared element", is said to be an object to the arahant's mind, and
here it is called āyatana.
Then the commentary raises the question, why earth, water, fire and air are
not there in that asaṅkhata dhātu. The four elements are representative of things
prepared, saṅkhata. There cannot be any mingling or juxtaposition between the
saṅkhata and the asaṅkhata. That is why earth, water, fire and air are not
supposed to be there, in that āyatana.
The question why there are no formless states, like the sphere of infinite
space, the sphere of infinite consciousness, the sphere of nothingness, the sphere
of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, is similarly explained, while asserting
that Nibbāna is nevertheless formless.
Since in Nibbāna one has transcended the sensuous sphere, kāmaloka, the
concepts of a this world and a world beyond are said to be irrelevant. As to why
the sun and the moon are not there, the commentary gives the following
explanation:
In realms of form there is generally darkness, to dispel which there must be a
sun and a moon. But Nibbāna is not a realm of form, so how could sun and
moon come in?
Then what about the reference to a coming, a going, a staying, a passing away
and an arising? No one comes to Nibbāna from anywhere and no one goes out
from it, no one stays in it or passes away or reappears in it.
Now all this is mystifying enough. But the commentary goes on to interpret
the three terms appatiṭṭhaṃ, appavattaṃ and anārammaṇaṃ also in the same
vein. Only that which has form gets established and Nibbāna is formless,
therefore it is not established anywhere. Nibbāna does not continue, so it is
appavattaṃ, or non-continuing. Since Nibbāna takes no object, it is objectless,
anārammaṇaṃ. It is as good as saying that, though one may take Nibbāna as an
object, Nibbāna itself takes no object.
So this is what the traditional interpretation amounts to. If there are any
shortcomings in our explanation, one is free to go for the commentarial. But it is
obvious that there is a lot of confusion in this commentarial trend. Insufficient
appreciation of the deep concept of the cessation of existence seems to have
caused all this confusion.
More often than otherwise, commentarial interpretations of Nibbāna leaves
room for some subtle craving for existence, bhavataṇhā. It gives a vague idea of
a place or a sphere, āyatana, which serves as a surrogate destination for the
arahants after their demise. Though not always explicitly asserted, it is at least
tacitly suggested. The description given above is ample proof of this trend. It
conjures up a place where there is no sun and no moon, a place that is not a
place. Such confounding trends have crept in probably due to the very depth of
this Dhamma.
Deep indeed is this Dhamma and hard to comprehend, as the Buddha once
confided in Venerable Sāriputta with a trace of tiredness:
Saṅkhittenapi kho ahaṃ, Sāriputta, dhammaṃ deseyyaṃ, vitthārenapi kho
ahaṃ, Sāriputta, dhammaṃ deseyyaṃ, saṅkhittenavitthārenapi kho ahaṃ,
Sāriputta, dhammaṃ deseyyaṃ, aññātāro ca dullabhā.
"Whether I were to preach in brief, Sāriputta, or whether I were to preach in
detail, Sāriputta, or whether I were to preach both in brief or in detail, Sāriputta,
rare are those who understand."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 229):
“Sāriputta, I can teach the Dhamma briefly; I can teach the Dhamma in
detail; I can teach the Dhamma both briefly and in detail. It is those who can
understand that are rare.”
SĀ 982:
「我能於法略說、廣說，但知者難」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 255, b16-17)

--------------------------------
Then Venerable Sāriputta implores the Buddha to preach in brief, in detail
and both in brief and in detail, saying that there will be those who understand. In
response to it the Buddha gives the following instruction to Venerable Sāriputta:
Tasmātiha, Sāriputta, evaṃ sikkhitabbaṃ: 'Imasmiñca saviññāṇake kāye
ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānānusayā na bhavissanti, bahiddhā ca sabbanimittesu
ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānānusayā na bhavissanti, yañca cetovimuttiṃ
paññāvimuttiṃ upasampajja viharato ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānānusayā na
honti, tañca cetovimuttiṃ paññāvimuttiṃ upasampajja viharissāmā'ti. Evañhi
kho, Sāriputta, sikkhitabbaṃ,
"If that is so, Sāriputta, you all should train yourselves thus: In this conscious
body and in all external signs there shall be no latencies to conceits in terms of I-
ing and my-ing, and we will attain to and dwell in that deliverance of the mind
and that deliverance through wisdom whereby no such latencies to conceits of I-
ing and my-ing will arise. Thus should you all train yourselves!"
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 229):
“Therefore, Sāriputta, you should train yourselves thus: ‘There will be no I-
making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit in regard to this
conscious body; there will be no I-making, mine-making, and underlying
tendency to conceit in regard to all external objects; and we will enter and
dwell in that liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom, through which there is
no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one
who enters and dwells in it.’ It is in this way, Sāriputta, that you should train
yourselves..”
SĀ 982:
「舍利弗！彼比丘於此識身及外境界一切相，無有我、我所見、我慢繫著
使，及心解脫、慧解脫，現法自知作證具足住；於此識身及外境界一切相
，無有我、我所見、我慢繫著使，彼心解脫、慧解脫，現法自知作證具足
住」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 255, b25-29)

--------------------------------
The Buddha goes on to declare the final outcome of that training: Ayaṃ
vuccati, Sāriputta, bhikkhu acchecchi taṇhaṃ vāvattayi saṃyojanaṃ sammā
mānābhisamayā antam akāsi dukkhassa.
"Such a monk, Sāriputta, is called one who has cut off craving, turned back
the fetters, and by rightly understanding conceit for what it is, has made an end
of suffering."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 230):
“He is called a bhikkhu who has cut off craving, stripped off the fetter, and,
by completely breaking through conceit, has made an end of suffering.”
SĀ 982:
「是名比丘斷愛縛結，慢無間等，究竟苦邊」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 255, c8-9)

--------------------------------
We find the Buddha summing up his exhortation by quoting two verses from
a Sutta in the Pārāyanavagga of the Sutta Nipāta, which he himself had
preached to the Brahmin youth Udaya. We may mention in passing that among
canonical texts, the Sutta Nipāta was held in high esteem so much so that in a
number of discourses the Buddha is seen quoting from it, particularly from the
two sections Aṭṭhakavagga and Pārāyanavagga. Now the two verses he quotes
in this instance from the Pārāyanavagga are as follows:
Pahānaṃ kāmacchandānaṃ,
domanassāna cūbhayaṃ,
thīṇassa ca panūdanaṃ,
kukkuccānaṃ nivāraṇaṃ,
Upekhāsatisaṃsuddhaṃ,
dhammatakkapurejavaṃ,
aññāvimokhaṃ pabrūmi,
avijjāyappabhedanaṃ.
"The abandonment of both sensuous perceptions,
And unpleasant mental states,
 The dispelling of torpidity,
And the warding off of remorse,
The purity born of equanimity and mindfulness,
With thoughts of Dhamma forging ahead,
And blasting ignorance,
This I call the deliverance through full understanding."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 230):
“The abandoning of both
Sensual perceptions and dejection;
The dispelling of dullness,
The warding off of remorse
Purified equanimity and mindfulness
Preceded by reflection on the Dhamma:
This, I say, is emancipation by final knowledge,
The breaking up of ignorance.”
SĀ 982:
「世間數差別， 安所遇不動，
寂靜離諸塵， 拔根無悕望，
已度三有海， 無復老死患」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 255, c11-13)

--------------------------------
This is ample proof of the fact that the arahattaphalasamādhi is also called
aññāvimokkha. Among the Nines of the Aṅguttara Nikāya we come across
another discourse which throws more light on the subject. Here Venerable
Ānanda is addressing a group of monks.
Acchariyaṃ, āvuso, abbhutam, āvuso, yāvañcidaṃ tena Bhagavatā jānatā
passatā arahatā sammāsambuddhena sambādhe okāsādhigamo anubuddho
sattānaṃ visuddhiyā sokapariddavānaṃ samatikkamāya dukkhadomanassānaṃ
atthaṅgamāya ñāyassa adhigamāya nibbānassa sacchikiriyāya.
Tadeva nāma cakkhuṃ bhavissati te rūpā tañcāyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedissati.
Tadeva nāma sotaṃ bhavissati te saddā tañcāyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedissati.
Tadeva nāma ghānaṃ bhavissati te gandhā tañcāyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedissati.
Sā ca nāma jivhā bhavissati te rasā tañcāyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedissati. So ca
nāma kāyo bhavissati te phoṭṭhabbā tañcāyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedissati.
"It is wonderful, friends, it is marvellous, friends, that the Exalted One who
knows and sees, that Worthy One, fully enlightened, has discovered an
opportunity in obstructing circumstances for the purification of beings, for the
transcending of sorrow and lamentation, for the ending of pain and unhappiness,
for the attainment of the right path, for the realization of Nibbāna.
 In as much as that same eye will be there, those forms will be there, but one
will not be experiencing the appropriate sense-sphere. That same ear will be
there, those sounds will be there, but one will not be experiencing the
appropriate sense-sphere. That same nose will be there, those smells will be
there, but one will not be experiencing the appropriate sense-sphere. That same
tongue will be there, those flavours will be there, but one will not be
experiencing the appropriate sense-sphere. That same body will be there, those
tangibles will be there, but one will not be experiencing the appropriate sense-
sphere."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1301):
“It’s astounding and amazing, friends, that the Blessed One, the Arahant, the
Perfectly Enlightened One, who knows and sees, has discovered the
achievement of an opening in the midst of confinement: for the purification of
beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the passing away of
pain and dejection, for the achievement of the method, for the realization of
nibbāna.
The eye itself as well as those forms will actually be present, and yet one will
not experience that base. The ear itself as well as those sounds will actually be
present, and yet one will not experience that base. The nose itself as well as
those odors will actually be present, and yet one will not experience that base.
The tongue itself as well as those tastes will actually be present, and yet one
will not experience that base. The body itself as well as those tactile objects
will actually be present, and yet one will not experience that base.”
SĀ 559:
「時，尊者迦摩詣尊者阿難所，共相問訊慰勞已，於一面坐。語尊者阿難
：「奇哉！尊者阿難！有眼有色、有耳有聲、有鼻有香、有舌有味、有身
有觸、有意有法，而有比丘有是等法，能不覺知。云何？尊者阿難！彼比
丘為有想不覺知，為無想故不覺知？」
尊者阿難語迦摩比丘言：「有想者亦不覺知，況復無想。」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 146, b26-c4)

--------------------------------
What is so wonderful and marvellous about this newly discovered opportunity
is that, though apparently the senses and their corresponding objects come
together, there is no experience of the appropriate spheres of sense contact.
When Venerable Ānanda had described this extraordinary level of experience in
these words, Venerable Udāyī raised the following question:
Saññīmeva nu kho āvuso Ānanda, tadāyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedeti udāhu
asaññī? "Friend, is it the fact that while being conscious one is not experiencing
that sphere or is he unconscious at that time?"
 Venerable Ānanda affirms that it is while being conscious, saññīmeva, that
such a thing happens. Venerable Udāyī's cross-question gives us a further clue to
the riddle like verse we discussed earlier, beginning with na sañña saññī na
visañña saññī.
It is indeed puzzling why one does not experience those sense-objects, though
one is conscious. As if to drive home the point, Venerable Ānanda relates how
he once answered a related question put to him by the nun Jaṭilagāhiyā when he
was staying at the Deer park in Añjanavana in Sāketa. The question was:
Yāyaṃ, bhante Ānanda, samādhi na cābhinato na cāpanato na ca
sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritavato, vimuttattā ṭhito, ṭhitattā santusito, santusitattā
no paritassati. Ayaṃ, bhante, samādhi kiṃphalo vutto Bhagavatā?
"That concentration, Venerable Ānanda, which is neither turned towards nor
turned outwards, which is not a vow constrained by preparations, one that is
steady because of freedom, contented because of steadiness and not hankering
because of contentment, Venerable Sir, with what fruit has the Exalted One
associated that concentration?"
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1302):
“Bhante Ānanda, the concentration that does not lean forward and does not
bend back, and that is not reined in and checked by forcefully suppressing [the
defilements]—by being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by
being content, one is not agitated. Bhante Ānanda, what did the Blessed One
say this concentration has as its fruit?”
SĀ 557:
「若無相心三昧，不涌、不沒，解脫已住，住已解脫。尊者阿難！世尊說
此何果、何功德？」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 146, a16-18)
-------------------------------
The question looks so highly compressed that the key words in it might need
some clarification. The two terms abhinata and apanata are suggestive of lust
and hate, as well as introversion and extroversion. This concentration is free
from these extreme attitudes. Whereas in ordinary concentration saṅkhāras, or
preparations, exercise some degree of control as the term vikkhambhana,
"propping up", "suppression", suggests, here there is no implication of any
forcible action as in a vow. Here the steadiness is born of freedom from that
very constriction.
Generally, the steadiness characteristic of a level of concentration is not much
different from the apparent steadiness of a spinning top. It is the spinning that
keeps the top up. But here the very freedom from that spinning has brought
about a steadiness of a higher order, which in its turn gives rise to contentment.
The kind of peace and contentment that comes with samādhi in general is
brittle and irritable. That is why it is sometimes called kuppa paṭicca santi,
"peace subject to irritability". Here, on the contrary, there is no such irritability.
 We can well infer from this that the allusion is to akuppā cetovimutti,
"unshakeable deliverance of the mind". The kind of contentment born of
freedom and stability is so perfect that it leaves no room for hankering,
paritassanā.
However, the main point of the question posed by that nun amounts to this:
What sort of a fruit does a samādhi of this description entail, according to the
words of the Exalted One? After relating the circumstances connected with the
above question as a flash back, Venerable Ānanda finally comes out with the
answer he had given to the question:
Yāyaṃ, bhagini, samādhi na cābhinato na cāpanato na ca
sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritavato, vimuttattā ṭhito, ṭhitattā santusito, santusitattā
no paritassati, ayaṃ, bhagini, samādhi aññāphalo vutto Bhagavatā.
"Sister, that concentration which is neither turned towards nor turned
outwards, which is not a vow constrained by preparations, one that is steady
because of freedom, contented because of steadiness and not hankering because
of contentment, that concentration, sister, has been declared by the Buddha to
have full understanding as its fruit."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2012: 1302):
“‘Sister, the concentration that does not lean forward and does not bend
back, and that is not reined in and checked by forcefully suppressing [the
defilements]—by being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by
being content, one is not agitated. The Blessed One said this concentration has
final knowledge as its fruit.’”
Comment Bodhi (2012: 1829 notes 1930 and 1931):
“Ayaṃ, bhante Ānanda, samādhi kiṃphalo vutto bhagavatā. The question is
ambiguous. It could mean either, “Of what did the Blessed One say this
concentration is the fruit?” or “What did the Blessed One say this
concentration has as its fruit?” …
Ayaṃ, bhagini, samādhi aññāphalo vutto bhagavatā. The compound
aññāphalo could be interpreted either as a tappurisa (“this concentration is
the fruit of final knowledge”) or as a bāhubbīhi (“this concentration has final
knowledge as its fruit”). In the former case, the samādhi is to be identified
with the fruit; in the latter, with an achievement preceding the fruit. Mp takes
it in the former sense, as the fruit itself: “The nun asks about the
concentration of the fruit of arahantship (arahattaphalasamādhi). Final
knowledge is arahantship. The Blessed One has spoken of this concentration of
the fruit of arahantship. [The intention is:] When one is percipient with the
perception of the fruit of arahantship, one does not experience that base.”
However, the question kiṃphalā occurs repeatedly at SN V 118,22–120,19,
where it must mean, “What does it have as its fruit?”
 And in 5:25 we find pañcahi, bhikkhave, aṅgehi anuggahitā sammādiṭṭhi ca
cetovimuttiphalā hoti … paññāvimuttiphalā ca hoti. The sense here is not that
right view is the fruit of liberation of mind and liberation by wisdom, but that
right view has liberation of mind and liberation by wisdom as its fruit.
Further, in 3:101, a samādhi described in exactly the same terms as this one
is shown to be the supporting condition for the six higher knowledges, the last
of which is the “the taintless liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom.” By
analogy, it follows that this samādhi is not the fruit of final knowledge, but one
that yields final knowledge.”
SĀ 557
尊者阿難語諸比丘尼：「姊妹！若無相心三昧，不涌、不沒、解脫已住，
住已解脫，世尊說是智果、智功德。」
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 146, a3-5)

若無相心三昧 here would correspond to animitta cetosamādhi

-------------------------------
Aññā, or full understanding, is one that comes with realization conferring
certitude and it is the fruit of the concentration described above. Then, as if
coming back to the point, Venerable Ānanda adds: Evaṃ saññīpi kho, āvuso, tad
āyatanaṃ no paṭisaṃvedeti. "Being thus conscious, too, friend, one does not
experience an appropriate sphere of sense."
So now we have garnered sufficient evidence to substantiate the claims of this
extraordinary arahattaphalasamādhi. It may also be mentioned that sometimes
this realization of the arahant is summed up in a sentence like anāsavaṃ
cetovimuttiṃ paññāvimuttiṃ diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṃ abhiññā sacchikatvā
upasampajja viharati, "having realized by himself through higher knowledge
here and now the influx-free deliverance of the mind and deliverance through
wisdom, he dwells having attained to it."
There is another significant discourse in the section of the Fours in the
Aṅguttara Nikāya which throws some light on how one should look upon the
arahant when he is in arahattaphalasamādhi. The discourse deals with four
types of persons, namely:
1) anusotagāmī puggalo "downstream bound person"
2) paṭisotagāmī puggalo "upstream bound person"
3) ṭhitatto puggalo "stationary person"
4) tiṇṇo pāragato thale tiṭṭhati brāhmaṇo "the Brahmin standing on dry
ground having crossed over and gone beyond".
The first type of person indulges in sense pleasures and commits evil deeds
and is thus bound downstream in saṃsāra. The second type of person refrains
from indulgence in sense pleasures and from evil deeds. His upstream struggle is
well expressed in the following sentence: Sahāpi dukkhena sahāpi domanassena
assumukhopi rudamāno paripuṇṇaṃ parisuddhaṃ brahmacariyaṃ carati, "even
with pain, even with displeasure, with tearful face and crying he leads the holy
life in its fullness and perfection."
The third type, the stationary, is the non-returner who, after death, goes to the
Brahma world and puts an end to suffering there, without coming back to this
world.
It is the fourth type of person who is said to have crossed over and gone to the
farther shore, tiṇṇo pāragato, and stands there, thale tiṭṭhati. The word brahmin
is used here as an epithet of an arahant. This riddle-like reference to an arahant
is explained there with the help of the more thematic description āsavānaṃ
khayā anāsavaṃ cetovimuttiṃ paññāvimuttiṃ diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṃ abhiññā
sacchikatvā upasampajja viharati, "with the extinction of influxes he attains to
and abides in the influx free deliverance of the mind and deliverance through
wisdom".
This brings us to an extremely deep point in our discussion on Nibbāna. If the
arahant in arahattaphalasamādhi is supposed to be standing on the farther
shore, having gone beyond, what is the position with him when he is taking his
meals or preaching in his every day life? Does he now and then come back to
this side?
Whether the arahant, having gone to the farther shore, comes back at all is a
matter of dispute. The fact that it involves some deeper issues is revealed by
some discourses touching on this question.
The last verse of the Paramaṭṭhakasutta of the Sutta Nipāta, for instance,
makes the following observation:
Na kappayanti na purekkharonti,
dhammā pi tesaṃ na paṭicchitāse,
na brāhmaṇo sīlavatena neyyo,
pāraṃgato na pacceti tādi.
"They, the arahants, do not formulate or put forward views,
They do not subscribe to any views,
The true Brahmin is not liable to be led astray by ceremonial rites and ascetic
vows,
The Such like One, who has gone to the farther shore, comes not back."
-------------------------------
Translation Bodhi (2017: 296):
“They do not construct, they have no preferences. Even the teachings are
not embraced by them. A brahmin cannot be led by good behavior and
observances; The impartial one, gone beyond, does not fall back.”
-------------------------------
It is the last line that concerns us here. For the arahant it uses the term tādī, a
highly significant term which we came across earlier too. The rather literal
rendering "such-like" stands for steadfastness, for the unwavering firmness to
stand one's ground. So, the implication is that the arahant, once gone beyond,
does not come back. The steadfastness associated with the epithet tādī is
reinforced in one Dhammapada verse by bringing in the simile of the firm post
at the city gate: Indakhīlūpamo tādi subbato, "who is steadfast and well
conducted like the pillar at the city gate."
The verse in question, then, points to the conclusion that the steadfast one, the
arahant, who has attained supramundane freedom, does not come back.